Letters to the editor for Sunday, March 8, 2015

Sheriff uninformed about marijuana

Citizens of Carson City, be aware. Your sheriff must live in a bubble dating to the days of Reefer Madness. His comments referring to meth and heroin users vs. marijuana users are appalling and way off base.

Tweakers are unstable, dangerous, and often prone to theft and violence to get their drug fix. Most marijuana users in this country are stable average citizens. The medical use and benefits are time-proven, well-documented and scientifically factual.

In my 64 years on the planet and growing up as a teen in the 60s, I have witnessed and known quite a few folks who smoke “weed.” They are just normal people going to work, paying taxes and raising kids. They use this herb for relaxation and enjoyment. Most users are content to relax and just mellow out. That is the true culture of marijuana, not a “cherished culture” the sheriff speaks of.

His statement that he doesn’t think marijuana causes people to commit violent crimes, but says it plays a role and, “Second to domestic violence, marijuana is at the top of our list of violent acts, here in Carson City,” is absurd.

Alcohol, meth and heroin use are the real culprits. There are exceptions and violators of any segment of the population. This could be with food, alcohol, guns, motorcycles, etc.

In this day and age, it’s sad to see someone in this position so uninformed of the real facts and so misleading to the reality of it all.

Phill Kowalski


Laxalt should be commended for immigration stance

Nevada Attorney General Adam Laxalt should be commended for demonstrating political fortitude in his decision to join with 26 state attorneys general challenging President Obama’s program granting lawful status to an estimated 4.3 million undocumented aliens through executive branch action. Laxalt’s stated reason for taking his action was to “take a stand on behalf of Nevadans in support of the rule of law, the U.S. Constitution and the separation of powers between Congress and the president.”

Laxalt noted President Obama had publicly admitted on at least 15 occasions that he did not have the power to change immigration law — before doing just that.

Laxalt’s legal position was vindicated on Feb. 16 when a federal district judge entered an order prohibiting enforcement of the Obama administration program, called Deferred Action for Parents of Americans (DAPA), which grants work authorization, Social Security eligibility and eligibility for important federal and state benefits to virtually all undocumented residents who have been in the U.S. since 2010, had a baby in this country, and have not committed felonies.

The Obama administration argued that DAPA was a routine application of “prosecutorial discretion,” but the district court recognized that “prosecutorial discretion” is limited to nonenforcement of law and not to the executive branch granting wide-ranging affirmative benefits such as work permits, Social Security, tax credits and welfare, without there being Congressional action.

Congratulations to the 26 states — including Nevada — that are holding firm against President Obama’s overreach — so far successfully.

Jim Hartman


Public agencies need to do their job

With great hope, the Great Recession, which had started in 2007, would have brought a newfound age of government efficiency, but instead we must attribute the actual result as just SOS — same old stuff (stronger “S” word substitution can be made).

How naive I was to think that a national state budget crisis would’ve brought much needed reform to the state and federal governments. In my own experience, within the State of Nevada, I’m saddened to report that many of the state government agencies are not doing their jobs. Furloughs and other budget cuts have not helped public employee morale one iota.

On the other hand, if a one is employed to do a job, the job needs to still be performed. Several of our state agencies such as the Department of Education and the Department of Business and Industry to name a couple are not providing full service. There is one business that I know of that is doing business with a revoked license and when I reported it, nothing was done. He is still conducting business as far as I know.

The governor has been criticized for wanting to cut many public budgets, and who can blame him? If an agency won’t do its job, then shut it down and look at the money taxpayers can save! We all want value for our dollar — even our public dollar!

Rob Riley

Carson City

Differs from Macquarie on public lands

In her Feb. 25 opinion, Anne Macquarie alleges that the Senate Joint Resolution 1 wording urging Congress to enact legislation transferring title to certain public lands to the State of Nevada per the report of the Nevada Land Management Task Force will result in sale of the public lands and elimination of public access. I don’t recall seeing Ms. Macquarie at any of the many Task Force meetings that I attended.

All of the issues she raises were discussed extensively at the meetings where all Nevada counties were represented ­almost entirely by County Commissioners. Perhaps she has not reviewed the BLM Resource Management Plan for Southern Nevada that puts 3 million acres into Areas of Critical Environmental Concern, which will severely limit recreational activities, or the three BLM district RMPs also in progress that will impose numerous limitations on use of the public lands ­with all decisions made by unelected bureaucrats behind closed doors.

In my view, the primary purpose of transferring the lands to the state is to stop the BLM and other federal agencies from systematically eliminating grazing and public access to these lands. If transferred, the plan is not to sell off the vast rangeland, but rather to selectively sell off parcels in the railroad checkerboard or near population centers where there is opportunity for economic development. It is also the plan to retain “multiple use” public access as easements anywhere that becomes an issue. I trust an open process managed by local elected officials.

Robert Clifford


Recall, Taxpayer Protection Pledge legitimate

Appeal columnist Nancy Dallas’s recent Andy Rooney style rant about the Republican legislative budget debate was curiously selective.

She’s against the Taxpayer Protection Pledge, but as Pledge author Grover Norquist says, “Raising taxes is what lazy politicians do instead of the hard work needed to reform government.” Gov. Sandoval proposes raising taxes to fund expensive new education initiatives that won’t improve learning. Shouldn’t he and his new Republican legislative majority instead be rolling up their sleeves and reforming Nevada’s bloated, top-heavy school system?

Nancy also disapproves of the legislative recall efforts under way. But when mendacious politicians like Speaker John Hambrick announced — post election — that they will violate their campaign promises and support Sandoval’s tax increases, why shouldn’t voters remove them from office?

Nancy reserved her mildest disapproval for the slightly hysterical attack by the Senate Finance Committee’s RINO caucus against Nevada Treasurer Dan Schwartz, who merely reminded them of Sandoval’s anti-tax campaign message. Like many in the political establishment, Nancy is discomfited when elected Republicans follow through on their promise of smaller government and lower taxes.

The recall initiative and the Taxpayer Protection Pledge are two perfectly legitimate voter tools to ensure cleaner government. Dallas should understand that when honest politicians level with their voters these measures aren’t necessary and she wouldn’t have anything to complain about.

Lynn Muzzy


Addressing flag on ‘C’ Hill

Sadly the flag on “C” Hill ridge I wrote about Feb. 8 blew down in the high winds last week. The standard, bent at a 90 degree angle, is all that is visible.

Hopefully the good citizen who originally raised it can do it again.

Charles H. Smith

Carson City

Trade Clark County for Eldorado or Lassen county

I do not understand why the Democrats want to allow criminals to vote. It is state law that you have to have a state issued ID. If you do not have one, you are a criminal.

There should be no problem showing your ID to prove who you are before voting. I can see why the Democrats wanted Gov. Sandoval to intervene; he is just a Las Vegas Democrat with a Republican tie tack.

The U.S. Constitution says the regulating of the vote is up to the states. Maybe we should work out a trade with California — our Clark County for California’s Eldorado or Lassen counties.

Rob Cobb, Jr.

Carson City


Use the comment form below to begin a discussion about this content.

Sign in to comment